Lawmakers have asked Vice President Sara Duterte how she was able to conclude that the prosecution has failed to present any evidence in her impeachment trial, despite the proceedings having gone on for eight weeks, while she has been absent.
In an ambush interview on the sidelines of Duterte’s trial on Wednesday, public prosecutor and Bicol Saro party-list Rep. Terry Ridon said that if Duterte had attended some of the hearings, she would have seen the magnitude of evidence presented by the prosecution.
‘Maybe if our vice president had shown up to her trial from the start, she would know the state of the evidence laid down by the prosecution,’ Ridon told reporters.
‘And I think it is very important to remind (the public) that it has been weeks, I think this is the eighth week of the trial, but the vice president chose not to show up to this trial,’ he added.
In a separate press briefing, Deputy Speaker Jefferson Khonghun said that Duterte’s statements will be a good test of how the Senate Impeachment Court will implement Rule 18, the sub judice rule, which bars comments and disclosures on the merits of the case.
‘It doesn’t look good that the presiding officer is reading the ruling on sub judice and then the vice president is discussing the case. She has not attended her trial, and yet she chooses to say a lot of things outside,’ he added.
On Wednesday morning, while her trial was ongoing, Duterte released a statement calling out the prosecution and some members of the impeachment court.
Duterte said that the prosecution has been relying on ‘theatrics’ and ‘insults,’ while saying that a senator-judge called a witness ‘stupid.’
She also claimed that the prosecution has been fishing for evidence in an attempt to ‘legitimize the two impeachment complaints,’ which she said were ‘filed without a shred of evidence.’
When asked whether he thinks Duterte will follow Rule 18, Khonghun said ‘no.’
‘Ever since, she has not behaved well. You saw how she acted outside the court, so we do not expect the vice president to follow the court’s orders. She hasn’t even shown up yet,’ he added.
Earlier, prosecution spokesperson and impeachment adviser Robert Ace Barbers said that they would seek clarification from the impeachment court on the matter.
Eventually, House lead prosecutor and Batangas Rep. Gerville Luistro asked Escudero if she could make a manifestation on the matter. Escudero stopped Luistro, saying that he was well on his way to addressing the matter.
Escudero said that since Duterte’s statements were made while the ruling was being discussed, they fell under the principle of prospectivity. However, he asked the defense panel, particularly lead defense lawyer Sheila Sison, to remind her client about the matter.
Lawmakers have previously called out Duterte’s absence from the trial. On Aug. 3, Ridon questioned why she could travel abroad but not attend the trial.
Duterte is not required to attend the trial, as she is represented by her counsel. However, last August 17, Manila Rep. Bienvenido Abante Jr. – one of the endorsers of the fourth impeachment complaint – said Duterte should show up and answer the allegations herself, instead of having her staff face tough questions from the parties and senator-judges.
According to Abante, if Duterte can attend the proceedings for her perjury charge against ex-aide Ramil Madriaga and the arraignment of her brother Davao City Rep. Paolo Duterte for his grave threats case, the vice president should also make time for the impeachment court and not let staffers alone be grilled.